lawfag here - anons seemed interested in the topic of legal meanings/applications etc. . with the terms collusion and conspiracy and obstruction - so i wrote a summary
conspiracy is an agreement of two or more persons to engage in some form of prohibited conduct. The crime is complete upon agreement, although some statutes require prosecutors to show that at least one of the conspirators has taken some concrete step or committed some overt act in furtherance of the scheme.
There are DOZENS of federal conspiracy statutes. There is an "omnibus" too (18 U.S.C. 371), which outlaws conspiracy to commit "some other" federal crime!
From the prosecutors POV the BEST thing about conspiracy is what may be called "joint and shared culpability" which means that ALL co-conspirators are equally culpable for ALL the crimes of ALL the members of the conspiracy - whether they did them or not and even whether they knew of them or not (if they wer foreseeable and/or the subject of the conspiracy) Pretty juicy?
NOT only that - there are exceptions to the rules on hearsay AND there are even exceptions to double jeopardy. Too complex for this post but the exception for hearsay is so notable that i will post it: Rule 801(d)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules provides that an out-of-court statement is not hearsay if it is "…a statement by a co-conspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.” Sounds good right? IT IS - if you are the prosecutor!
COLLUSION - is NOT A CRIME in and of itself - NO SUCH THING in federal or state law -HOWEVER, Collusion MAY BE an ELEMENT of other crimes - most often in the arena of price fixing and atni-trust cases. In other words it is unlawful to collude to rig or fix prices.
But now to expose the parsing and misleaiding MSM narrative - It is true that the DICTIONARY definition of the word "collusion" is somewhat synonomous to "conspiracy". But when it comes to CRIMINAL statutes the two words are NOT the same. So the purpose of these intentional and repeated conflation of these two words in the context of anti-POTUS narratives becomes perfectly clear- which is to associate POTUS with criminal activity - simply put it is an intentional smear campaign.
(see this LOL politfact article which clearly shows the tactic - and offers many keks https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/31/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-collusion-no-crime-right/
Finally - OBSTRUCTION - This is a general term for the unlawful and intentional impediment of governmental activities. AGAIN there are dozens of federal criminal laws. A sample of the most general: obstruction of judicial proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1503), witness tampering (18 U.S.C. 1512), witness retaliation (18 U.S.C. 1513), obstruction of congressional or administrative proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1505), and conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. 371)
What all these have in common is the requirement of an intentional frustration of governmental purposes - after that the sky is the limit - obstruction by violence, corruption, destruction of evidence, deceit, bribery, murder, intimidation, use of physical force, or alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsified, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object … etc etc etc etc…
Once again this is a favorite of prosecutors because as made painfully obvious by the foregoing - it is extremely broad ranging and super easy to allege - while it is extremely burdensome to defend. Coincidence? NO.
In closing lawfag wishes to remind anons of the common theme of his posts - THE LAW IS AN ASS! The complex chaos of criminal laws makes everyone a defendant - POLICE STATE we are. Does that mean there should be NO such laws? Hardly - lawfag says only "LET THE LAW APPLY EQUALLY TO THOSE IN THE GOVT." Then and only then will the law CEASE to be an ass - Illegitimi non carborundum!